"The use of torture of a known enemy soldier to gain some kind of military advantage I think is justifiable and smart. To go beyond that, to use torture techniques merely to intimidate people is completely wrong, unethical and immoral."

Yes, I finished the book and now it's been in my mind, that in the same way right wing hawks anticipate disasters of all sorts to push prepared agendas through legislation, we should likewise consider our strategy for what happens after the shock of 911 is revisited by the greater public with the inevitable acceptance of the truth.

I don't think we want to be just standing around with a "Now what" attitude. The chaos of renewing these visceral emotions will create a POWER VACUUM with various political personalities who were previously too cowardly to address the issues when it wasn't en vogue then jockeying for acceptance as the new face of reform in Washington.

If I'm right, is this also the case for establishing a third party explicitly built on the purpose of dealing with 911 and all related issues? Is there value in establishing a party made up of representatives from the whole political spectrum who resign to deal with ROOT CAUSES such as 911 and the Fed and allowing more peripheral issues to correct themselves or be dealt with in due time?

Recall Sept 10, 2008 National Press Club broadcast of the coalition of third party candidates (including Nader, McKinney, Paul et. al) united on four common points...